SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[Update 2: Successful mission! Successful separation, clean booster and escape capsule landing.
Mission launch time: 11:11AM EDT (15:11 UTC)
Max ascent velocity: 2,236 mph
max capsule apogee: 389,846ft (119km)
Mission elapsed time: 11m17s
Overheard on the live feed that max G forces for the escape capsule was: 10G.]
[Update 1: there was a brief hold of approximately 10 minutes; countdown has resumed.]
Watch Live: Blue Origin Subjects its Rocket to High-Altitude Escape Test:
As it continues to progress toward human flights, Blue Origin will perform another potentially dangerous, uncrewed test today of its New Shepard rocket and spacecraft. Although it has not yet provided details, the company says it will fly "a high altitude escape motor test—pushing the rocket to its limits." The test is scheduled to begin at 11 am EDT (15:00 UTC) [corrected times] at the company's West Texas launch site.
This is the ninth test of the reusable New Shepard system, and the third in which it has included commercial payloads on it short suborbital flights. This time, the company is also flying a suite of materials from Blue Origin employees as a part of its internal “Fly My Stuff” program. (It's unclear at this point exactly how "abort test" and "payload" fit together in the same mission—presumably the high altitude abort will be followed by the New Shepard spacecraft pressing to orbit, but we're not exactly sure. Blue Origin will have more details about exactly what's going on when its webcast starts.)
This is not the first high-energy test of New Shepard. In October, 2016, the company conducted a lower altitude in-flight escape test when engineers intentionally triggered the spacecraft's launch abort system at about 45 seconds after launch, and an altitude of 16,000 feet. Such systems are designed to fire quickly and separate the crew capsule from the booster during an emergency.
Live feed on YouTube should start approximately 20 minutes before the 11:00 EDT (15:00 UTC) launch.
Note: it appears the launch may have originally been scheduled at 14:00 UTC but now appears to be scheduled for 15:00 UTC.
See also: spaceflightnow and space.com (which still has the original launch time).
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday July 18 2018, @07:14PM (2 children)
Very true.
To be fair, SpaceX had some pretty impressive failures in their rush to try new stuff, and got really close to folding.
Bezos' slow-and-steady timeline is more traditional, and probably less risky. It just looks bad when the other guy's risk-taking pays off.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday July 18 2018, @08:18PM (1 child)
That is a good point. SpaceX was one launch away from folding. If that one launch had failed, they would be only a memory.
So your risk taking point is excellent.
That said, it is paid off so well, and so many times, that it seems SpaceX is doing something right.
I remember hearing, I think even back in the 1980's about the Shuttle program, if Apollo had to be done the way the Shuttle is done, it never would have made it off the ground, let alone the moon. It is a dangerous business. People are going to die. One day even on a SpaceX rocket. Just like automobiles. Just like aviation. We can only try to make it as safe as possible. There are no absolute guarantees of safety -- even sitting wherever you are sitting right now reading this post. Is there something about to crash through the ceiling in a giant fireball?
Another saying I heard: The Shuttle isn't ready to launch until the stack of signed-off paperwork is as high as the launch stack.
Shuttle was re-usable. But at what cost? If the turnaround cost could buy a new shuttle every 3 to 4 launches, that's not economically feasible reusability as SpaceX wants.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Wednesday July 18 2018, @08:57PM
> Is there something about to crash through the ceiling in a giant fireball?
Just went to check, and with his usual slurred speech, the guy cooking meth on the roof said "probably not".